I don't object to Dean trying to stay alive and stop bad things happening by making emotional appeals to Cas (as he did in 6.22 as well) I think what pushed the scene over the edge for me is precisely the fact that Dean does not fight back at all. He doesn't defend himself when Castiel starts to beat on him, just like he didn't with Samifer, so Dean's underlying motivation may have been different, but visually it was just too close for comfort for me. And I remember that I was uncomfortable with that Dean-Cas moment in 6.22 as well, mainly because when he told Castiel that he doesn't want to lose him like he did Sam, Lisa and Ben, he basically ignored that Cas was directly responsible for said losses and that just made that whole moment a farce IMO. The writers often just overdo it in these kinds of Dean-Cas moments, it's too forced to come off as believable.
I think the writing of that scene showed more subtlety than some reactions I've seen have credited it with. It's interesting that the "unicorn who carried Sam away from hunting" stuff is coming from Meg, not Sam, and that it is made clear how large an element of projection Meg has going on there. What Sam himself said was much more cautious and modest You know, this is one of those scenes where I keenly feel my loss of trust in the writers. Normally, I would just focus on Sam's moderate reaction to Meg's questions, because I did like that Sam showed no actual signs of agreeing with her assessment. But while I was watching I was asking myself: Of all the things Sam and Meg could be talking about, that is what they choose? Why? It made me question the writers' motivation to address this specific topic between them, even though they had already finished that chapter of Sam's story. The fact that they brought Amelia and a normal life up again simply made me suspicious.
(...) his tendency in Southern Comfort to see himself as the victim of other people's lies while seeing his own iterations of the same pattern of dishonesty as individual contingencies or mistakes but not inherently a betrayal I couldn't agree more. Well put!
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2013-03-27 10:20 pm (UTC)I think what pushed the scene over the edge for me is precisely the fact that Dean does not fight back at all. He doesn't defend himself when Castiel starts to beat on him, just like he didn't with Samifer, so Dean's underlying motivation may have been different, but visually it was just too close for comfort for me. And I remember that I was uncomfortable with that Dean-Cas moment in 6.22 as well, mainly because when he told Castiel that he doesn't want to lose him like he did Sam, Lisa and Ben, he basically ignored that Cas was directly responsible for said losses and that just made that whole moment a farce IMO. The writers often just overdo it in these kinds of Dean-Cas moments, it's too forced to come off as believable.
I think the writing of that scene showed more subtlety than some reactions I've seen have credited it with. It's interesting that the "unicorn who carried Sam away from hunting" stuff is coming from Meg, not Sam, and that it is made clear how large an element of projection Meg has going on there. What Sam himself said was much more cautious and modest
You know, this is one of those scenes where I keenly feel my loss of trust in the writers. Normally, I would just focus on Sam's moderate reaction to Meg's questions, because I did like that Sam showed no actual signs of agreeing with her assessment. But while I was watching I was asking myself: Of all the things Sam and Meg could be talking about, that is what they choose? Why? It made me question the writers' motivation to address this specific topic between them, even though they had already finished that chapter of Sam's story. The fact that they brought Amelia and a normal life up again simply made me suspicious.
(...) his tendency in Southern Comfort to see himself as the victim of other people's lies while seeing his own iterations of the same pattern of dishonesty as individual contingencies or mistakes but not inherently a betrayal
I couldn't agree more. Well put!